I had heard of him, but until you put the name up again, I had not read anything about him. Interesting fellow, now I want to learn more.Well, John Nelson Darby was not Wesleyan but he was a dispensational teacher, maybe the first.
As I have read more about this Theology I have come to one solid foundation thought of John Wesley to build my understanding from
Wesley believed that the living core of Christianity was revealed in Scripture; and the Bible was the sole foundational source of theological development. This seems to be ground zero for all of his theological thoughts. This should be an interesting journey.
In studying Wesley I have concluded he is not what I would call a Theologian's theologian. He founded no system even though he is considered a systematic theologian. He really belonged to no one school of thought, but seemed to embrace many for what became his Methodist approach. He was more like the well-educated fold preach that had a system and method. He did his theology in service to the church and mission. If not for the Methodist church growth, he would have gone unnoticed in the world of theology.
Just my thoughts at this point as I dig deeper.
Blade I am going to assume here that you find no value in know anything about the theology of Welsey?
I am just going to say this upfront I am not a pigeon-holed Christian that hate or accuse those from a different branch of thinking to be committing heresy. That is not my right, only God gets to sit in judgement of others actions and beliefs. I find certain historical figures that were and are still influencing the direction of Christianity. John Wesley is one of those I find fascinating. If he saw what had become of his thinking in the form of systematic theology, Wesleyan theology and the Methodists Churchs that claim his teachings as their found dogma, he would be shock and ashamed in large parts of it.
I do not believe in reading about him that he had the intention for his version of learning to study and understanding the Bible to be a theology. As I understand him, he was writing both to a small elite group of theologians and trying to provide a way for the minimally educated churchgoers to be able to understand and appreciate the bible and learn both the words and the meaning. Let us all be honest. Luther, Calvin, Arminius and even Wesley were trying to find ways to give the common person to understand. Most of those that attended were barely literate if at all. The learned by memorizing text and scripture, but most did not understand. They chose to believe what the Priest or clergy told them it meant. All these theologians wanted that changed. No one way was wrong. The systematic way was a direction that felt a system would work better than the others. In my opinion, it was all that was meant in the way it was done.
The problem with everything, and what we all face now, is that the original intentions is lost throughout time and sides are taken. That is what I have encountered in just presenting a look at an important figure in the historical development of Christianity. Look how far we have strayed from what Christ was trying to do. He just wanted to reform the Jewish belief and way of doing business. He wanted to change his religion, not be founder of another one. He failed in his mission to reform but succeeded in finding another based on his teachings. Instead of celebrating this, we all tend to fight over how to celebrate his teachings, each staking out our own beliefs as a territory and fighting against anything that is not the same. Why can't we all just celebrate his coming, passing, and resurrection and not get tied down to a singular way to see it? Just a question that vexes me.
So when I am talking and researching Wesley, I am not trying to insult anyone or to tell you your belief is wrong. I am celebrating just another way people have found to praise God and Jesus. Thats is all that is important.
Okay, Soap box is done.
I agree with false prophets, fraud preaching for profits and teachers/preachers that do not teach as the Bible asks us to needed pointed out.Mark, May I answer one or two of your points...They are valid and need answering.
But, my question who decides what makes a teaching false? There are Calvinist I know that state that Catholics are all heretics. Not so much because of the rituals, dogma, but because the version of the bibles is different. Those are the things that make me crazy. What gave that single person the right to spew hate because of their singular viewpoint. I know a believer in Coptic Christianity that is more holy and spiritual in his beliefs and teaching than two of my theology instructors. He teaches love, understanding, and guidance to finding a belief that is similar to what I think we both believe.
So, done with my babble and done wearing out soapboxes. lol
First Blade, I am not offended when it comes to how each person views their relationship with God. That is theirs, not mine. Second, you always take time to explain and flush out your point of view. It is not insulting or name-calling or damning me to hell. I am no a Calvinist nor a Wesleyan or for that matter any other defined theology at this point. I find them all fascinating and worthy of study. Some I enjoy more than others, some I struggle with.
I am the same when it comes to the choice of Bibles. Each to their own. I prefer the ESV for the academic side of things as much as I prefer the Oxford for the research side. I love the KJV for its eloquence but find that its eloquence sometimes hinders its understanding. But that is just my opinion and no one else's. I do my best not to force how I see things on others, but I will still express how I feel.
You said : "Not so much because of the rituals, dogma, but because the version of the bibles is different. " I said this based on multiple different experiences and not as some generic overview. If I was not clear it was from experience and only limited to that, I apologize. But it does happen. That is where we run afoul of choice of Bible and holding it so close to being the only acceptable view, that we can, in some instances, loose sight of spreading Jesus' teachings. I can get into a tit for tat over which is more accurate which is more used, which is based on the oldest etc. But that again defeats the complete purpose of the teachings of Jesus.
*Mark: are we not charged with spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ (according to scriptures), not someone's beliefs?
*Are we not also charged with calling those out who are preaching or teaching a "FALSE" Gospel so the reader can make a informed decision?
That is what I try to do. Give the WORD's of Jesus Christ independent of my own interpretation and let them decide.
Amen to that and I am agreement. I think we both have the same goals and desires on spreading the Gospel, we have just chosen a different approach to the same thing.
Thank you for your reply and the discussion. I am always grateful for it.
As I dig into John Wesley I am not sure he can be called a Theologian in the same sense as we do the reformers, but none the less he was a Theologian. Some I have noticed say he is not a Theologian since he has no theology of his own. Yet in same breath say I am a threologian because I have a degree in Theology. That just does not make sense.
I know as far as I am concerned he was a theologian. I believe he did have his own version of Theology. That I find his Theology very optimistic for the human relationship with God. He was very into us finding a holy love relationship with God.
I still struggle with his version of Grace though. Those that are Pauline oor Calvinist, will not like much about him has become obvious, even though he is kind of a closet Pauline in nature. In fact one of the Seminary's I took my first few courses at were a Methodist/Wesletan Seminary called St Paul.
The mre I read about Wesley and his Theology the more I see a combination of Luthers struggle as he started his move to his reformer self, the mysticism of Tauler and a lot of simplest thought seen in the nominalist school of thought of Biel.
This has made it really hard to get a true handle on his thoughts and not what we see now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B8LKoWAqtQ